Erstellt von DragonFighter  |  Antworten: 86  |  Aufrufe: 21187
Seite 1 von 9 12345 ... LetzteLetzte
  1. #1
    DragonFighter

    Avatar von DragonFighter
    Ich habe im Netz coole Bilder von Flugzeugen gefunden. Glaubt ihr an die existenz dieser Flugzeuge? Habt ihr mehr Bilder? Was glaubt was da alles abläuft?

    Quelle: http://www.area51zone.com
    Aurora (U-2 Nachfolger??????)
    Angehängte Grafiken Angehängte Grafiken

  2. Schau dir mal die beiden Links an:
    diesen Bestseller und die Flugzeug-Kategorie

    Registrieren bzw. einloggen, um diese und auch andere Anzeigen zu deaktivieren
  3. #2
    DragonFighter

    Avatar von DragonFighter
    Quelle:http://www.area51zone.com
    Black Manta
    Angehängte Grafiken Angehängte Grafiken

  4. #3
    Kobra


    Naja man glaubt schon Aurora fotografiert zu haben.

    (C)fas.org
    Angehängte Grafiken Angehängte Grafiken

  5. #4
    Erdferkel

    Avatar von Erdferkel
    Naja, wer das USENET kennt, und ab und an da mitliost wird das RAM-FAQ kennen. Da steht drin, das davon auszugehen ist, das die Aurora existiert, in irgenteiner Form müsste sehen, wie ich den text hierreinbekomme..


    Bitte, verzeiht mir, aber ich hab den Text nur als Englische Quelle und aufgrund der vorgerückten Stunde keine Zeit zum Übersetzen. Altavista Babblefish könnte villeicht was akzeptables ausspucken

    Subject: C.2. Does the USAF have a hypersonic spyplane called "Aurora"?

    Maybe. Here's the evidence.

    In 1985, a censor's error let an item labelled "Aurora", with no further
    explanation, appear in that year's Pentagon budget request, with a
    reference to "production funding" for 1987. It was located next to the
    operating budgets for the SR-71 and U-2. The Pentagon refused to comment
    on the item, and it has never been mentioned since.

    In 1986, the US government sealed off large areas of land around the top
    secret Groom Lake base in Nevada. Many new buildings have been built at
    Groom Lake during the 1980s, and intense activity continues. The
    government is currently (mid 1994) in the process of taking over more large
    areas of land around the base, in order to make it impossible to observe
    the base from publicly accessible land. The extensive security measures
    imply that some very important and very secret activity is going on there.
    Officially, the USAF won't even admit that the base exists.

    In February 1988, the _New York Times_ reported that the USAF was working
    on a stealthy reconnaissance aircraft capable of Mach 6. The story was
    attributed to "Pentagon sources".

    In August 1989, Chris Gibson, an oil exploration engineer and former member
    of the Royal Observer Corps, was working on an oil rig in the North Sea
    when he saw an unusual formation of aircraft pass overhead. It consisted
    of a KC-135 tanker, two F-111s, and a fourth aircraft of a type that Gibson
    (an expert on aircraft recognition) had never seen before. Seen from
    below, it appeared to be a perfect triangle, slightly larger than the
    escorting F-111s, with a leading edge sweep angle of about 75 degrees. It
    was completely black, with no visible details (unlike the F-111s), and
    appeared to be taking on fuel from the KC-135.

    In early 1990 the USAF retired its fleet of SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft;
    the official reason given was that satellites could now perform all
    strategic reconnaissance missions required by the Pentagon. Many observers
    consider this explanation to be suspicious, for several reasons. First,
    satellites exist in limited numbers and fixed, predictable orbits; surely
    there will always be a requirement for high-speed reconnaissance missions
    at short notice, which could only be performed by an aircraft like the
    SR-71. Second, the cost of running the SR-71 fleet was only about 7 per
    cent of what the Pentagon spends on satellites; it would still be a good
    investment even if only as an emergency backup. Third, the USAF never
    raised the slightest objection to the plan to replace manned aircraft with
    unmanned satellites, which is highly unusual behaviour for an organisation
    composed almost entirely of pilots.

    At about the same time, _Aviation Week_ carried reports from witnesses who
    had heard an incredibly loud aircraft taking off from Edwards Air Force
    Base in California late at night. Some of them referred to a pulsing sound
    with a period of about one second.

    On several occasions from June 1991 to June 1992, sonic booms were heard
    over southern California. They were not produced by any officially
    acknowledged military flight (which are always careful to remain subsonic
    over urban areas). The booms were powerful enough to show up on the
    seismographs operated by the US Geological Service, and the times of
    arrival of the sound at various points allowed fairly accurate calculation
    of the course and speed of the aircraft responsible; the USGS had already
    demonstrated this by tracking incoming space shuttles. The aircraft were
    headed northeast, over Los Angeles and the Mojave Desert, towards either
    the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada or the nearby Groom Lake base. The
    speeds involved ranged from Mach 3 to Mach 4.

    In February 1992, _The Scotsman_ reported that an RAF air traffic
    controller, in November 1991, had seen a radar blip emerge from the base at
    Machrihanish, Scotland, and quickly accelerate to Mach 3. When he called
    Machrihanish to ask what had happened, he was told to forget it.

    In May 1992, a photographer snapped some strange contrails over Amarillo,
    Texas; the trails appeared to have been produced by a high-speed aircraft,
    and resembled "doughnuts on a rope". A few days later, similar trails were
    reported over Machrihanish.

    All this appears to add up to a hypersonic aircraft, with a cruising speed
    around Mach 6, being operated by the USAF from Groom Lake, Nevada, Edwards
    AFB, California, and Machrihanish, Scotland, since about 1988
    (Machrihanish, by the way, is due to be closed in 1995). The aircraft
    described by Chris Gibson matches several design studies of hypersonic
    aircraft in the 1970s and 80s, which came up with a triangular planform
    with a sweep angle of 75 degrees. The engines appear to be rocket based
    combined cycle (RBCC) engines, an advanced hybrid of turbojet, ramjet, and
    rocket. Unclassified studies from the US, Japan, and Russia have
    investigated RBCC engines for hypersonic propulsion; such engines would be
    extremely loud on take-off, would produce a pulsing sound with a frequency
    on the order of one second, would leave contrails resembling "doughnuts on
    a rope", and should theoretically have a maximum speed not far above Mach
    6. The most likely fuel for an RBCC engine would be methane; given the
    assumptions of methane-fuelled RBCC engines, Mach 6 cruising speed, and
    intercontinental range, the resulting aircraft would indeed be about the
    size of an F-111.

    Does this aircraft exist? We don't know for certain, but the
    circumstantial evidence is certainly persuasive.

    Incidentally, the aircraft (if it exists) is almost certainly not called
    Aurora. Even if the mystery item in the 1985 budget did refer to this
    project, the name would probably have been changed after the security leak.
    But Aurora is the only name anyone has, so we continue to use it as a
    convenient label.

    Recently (mid 1994) there are moves afoot in the US Senate to reactivate
    three SR-71 aircraft (possibly in connection with the Korean situation).
    It was reported (from what sources is unclear) that the Blackbird successor
    programme had collapsed "after consuming several hundred million dollars".
    This has been interpreted by some to suggest that the "Aurora" was a
    failure.

    Ben Rich, who replaced Kelly Johnson as the head of Lockheed's "Skunk
    Works" and was responsible for the F-117) recently wrote a book
    Skunk Works
    Ben Rich and Leo Janos
    Little, Brown and Co.
    1994
    in which he stated that "Aurora" was the codename for Lockheed's entry
    in the ATB contest, lost to Northrop's B-2 (see section B.11). I'm
    told that the book is careful to make no mention of any SR-71
    successor, either to support or refute the idea.

    The best we can say at the moment is that the mystery remains open...

    [Most of this information comes from Bill Sweetman's book _Aurora_]

  6. #5
    AMIR

    Avatar von AMIR
    Jaja ..... :D .... darüber haben wir hier schon mal diskutiert. Was mich betrifft - solange ich kein offizielles Foto von einem bekannten Fotografen sehe, glaube ich nicht, dass sowas existiert!

  7. #6
    stevoe

    Avatar von stevoe
    Original geschrieben von DragonFighter
    Ich habe im Netz coole Bilder von Flugzeugen gefunden. Glaubt ihr an die existenz dieser Flugzeuge?
    Nein!
    Habt ihr mehr Bilder?
    Ja!
    http://www.flugzeugforum.de/forum/sh...ghlight=Aurora
    ;)

  8. #7
    Starfighter

    Avatar von Starfighter
    da kann ich mich nur anschliessen- ohne offizielle bestÄtigung und bilder glaube ich da mal GARNICHTS- wir wissen doch, auf was für nen Sch** à la F-19 man in den 80ern schon reingefallen ist...oder diese lustigen bilder, dieim gleichen jahrzehnt über das stealth-projekt kursierten- die bilder hatten weder mit der F-117 noch mit der B-2 auch nur entfernt ähnlichkeit.

  9. #8
    Christoph

    Avatar von Christoph
    Original geschrieben von Starfighter
    da kann ich mich nur anschliessen- ohne offizielle bestÄtigung und bilder glaube ich da mal GARNICHTS- wir wissen doch, auf was für nen Sch** à la F-19 man in den 80ern schon reingefallen ist...oder diese lustigen bilder, dieim gleichen jahrzehnt über das stealth-projekt kursierten- die bilder hatten weder mit der F-117 noch mit der B-2 auch nur entfernt ähnlichkeit.
    Nana! ;) Die F-19, bzw. das Modell davon, hat sehr viel mit der F-117 zu tun. Es besitzt genau die Formen, die die F-117 nicht hat. Somit wollte man die Leute täuschen, da sch bereits Gerüchte verdichtet hatten, was ein neues Flugzeug betraf.

  10. Hallo

    Schau dir doch mal die Luftfahrt-Kategorie an

    Registrieren bzw. einloggen, um diese und auch andere Anzeigen zu deaktivieren
  11. #9
    DragonFighter

    Avatar von DragonFighter
    Ich finde die sollten mal wieder einen neuen Jet rausbringen

  12. #10
    AMIR

    Avatar von AMIR
    Tun sie ja auch - die neuen Lego-Flugzeuge vom Typ JSF ....

Seite 1 von 9 12345 ... LetzteLetzte

Area 51 Flugzeuge

Ähnliche Themen

  1. Flugzeuge WK 1 & 2
    Von doppeldecker im Forum WK I & WK II
    Antworten: 28
    Letzter Beitrag: 03.08.16, 09:02
  2. Antworten: 33
    Letzter Beitrag: 16.11.13, 13:18
  3. Area 51
    Von Learjet im Forum Flugplätze
    Antworten: 3
    Letzter Beitrag: 23.12.10, 23:12
  4. Madrid area - oktober 2008
    Von Danger Zone im Forum Flugplätze
    Antworten: 18
    Letzter Beitrag: 06.02.09, 09:59

Besucher kamen mit folgenden Begriffen auf die Seite

englische flugzeuge bilder

RAF Machrihanish

Sie betrachten gerade Area 51 Flugzeuge